My iAudio X5L already has 30GB, photo and video display. It also plays OGG and FLAC, which I suspect the masses don't care about. They do, however, care if their MP3 player is a fashion item or not (which is why so many people advertise to muggers by walking everywhere with their player out in their hand), and let's face it, one thing Microsoft doesn't have is Apple's aura of letting you be cool and different, just like everyone else.
How does cutting R&D and the workforce = good business plan?
The plan would be to bleed them dry for a few years, pocket the cash, and by the time the no R&D's caught up with them, they've stripped and sold the carcass and moved on. This happening to Microsoft sounds too good to be true, really.
The "Extend" in this sequence is extending the Microsoft product to be incompatible with the ones following the standard that they claim to have "embraced". I don't see what you are suggesting here, a Microsoft FF fork? You must be thinking of the "announce partnership, steal ideas, end partnership" gameplan, which won't work either, unless Microsoft need help downloading a source tarball.
Well, that is a story about the government repression of science. Sounds like both "news for nerds" and "stuff that matters". I agree that summaries shouldn't add unneeded "tension" to act as "commentary", but you seem to be saying that Slashdot should only cover non-controvertial topics, like ponies or something.
It all depends how it's done. The police can't secretly encourage somebody to commit crime, then arrest them for it. What they can do is set up traps in high-crime areas and catch the perpetrators. For example, leave mobile phone on car seat, hide in bushes. When the local phone thief walks past and smashes the window, pop out and arrest him. Similarly, forces operate capture cars (sometimes known as rat traps), left parked in areas with a problem with vehicle theft. When they're stolen, they automatically lock the doors, and notify the police, who can then pop round to collect the thief.
Well, the government screwing up itself is one matter, it's just as I've notedbefore, it seems that the UK government likes to outsource its ITfailures, and I'm sure the US is no different. It strikes me as plain bizarre that an entity in as good a bargaining position as a government can't get a good deal, and that they keep on hiring the same few consultancies who are clearly incompetent.
A government department actually got some money back from an IT supplier that screwed up? Why isn't it standard for this to happen, instead of taxpayers always picking up the bill for projects that never work properly and go overbudget?
Yes, but those treaties do not prevent individuals claiming the moon. So this guy claimed it. I just checked the Lunar Embassy website, and it mentions a bunch of accolades he's got from the National Republican Congressional Committee, but that is not his reasoning why he owns it.
I still think it's not the greatest purchase in the world, it's not like you can nip over there for a weekend to enjoy your patch.
I was doing nothing in particular, but I'm confident there was nothing introduced to the PC between some of the clean scans and those where "infections" were found. If I was more cynical, I'd suggest the trial product faked infections to sell you the real thing, but I expect that it was just an awful detection engine (that was, IIRC, later thrown away after they bought out a rival).
If you want to see what a virus detection looks like, then look up the EICAR test string.
If this helps wake people up to the fact that anti-virus programs simply don't work, all the better. For example, at one time or another, nearly every antivirus package has declared applications with NSIS installers as malware. I remember having a McAfee trial on my computer, that would regularly make up infections. Yet, when a slightly updated version of a worm comes out, you're unprotected.
My original point didn't hang on whether the scans were in-house or not, merely that the tests are run, so I'm not going to argue with what you meant to say. Shame you didn't get back to this earlier, you missed your chance to get a free plug in:)
There are already a load of retro arcade collections available. I own a ton of GBA ones. Most of them are pretty good reproductions, but a few are awkward (like Bubble Bobble needs to zoom out or scroll to get the correct resolution, Robotron doesn't work exactly right because the GBA didn't have enough Fire buttons). I also own Atari Retro Classics DS, which has to be the buggiest, most thrown-together piece of junk I've seen in a long time. I nearly gave it to a jumble sale, but if somebody paid 10p for it, they'd have been ripped off. My absolute favourite is the Game & Watch Gallery, as it has both the originals, and remakes that work, by capturing the spirit of the originals.
I don't think this is a way to crack down on the sites - abandonware doesn't mean it's legal to copy, it's more of an "ethical" gloss, that you're not denying anyone a sale if the thing actually isn't for sale. There is some genuinely legit stuff- many companies have released their rights to 8-bit home computer games, authors who have released their stuff, and occasional bundle deals like with the HotRod joystick. However, the way the law is at the moment, there is no requirement to actually sell a product to keep copyright, and companies have the legal right to shut down sites should they feel like it.
It should also be noted that in many cases, it really is basically impossible to get the games legally for an emulator. A few years back, I enquired with a bunch of companies (a) Do you sell collections of your "classic" games, and (b) If I buy one, can I then get matching ROMsets for these games and use the emulator of my choice. Sega pointed me at the SegaPC division, who sent me a note reminding me that piracy is evilwrongnaughtybad. The person I spoke to at Hasbro Interactive hadn't even heard of emulation and didn't understand why I wanted to play the originals over their shiny remakes. Activision had the clue to know what I was asking, and said sorry that their classics-related offerings didn't let me grab the equivalent ROMs.
But! But! [insert terrorist action here] happened before [insert foreign policy screw-up here]. And why did the terrorists attack [insert somebody else's foreign policy screw-up here], when we're not even involved?
Signed, every minister that gets asked about terror on Today or PM
The way I interpret that is that when you do a search and click on a link, they record the search but not the click from the result page to the external site. I just checked, and currently Google isn't tracking normal result click-throughs for me either (though Yahoo does). It's also interesting to note that Clusty say:
Vivísimo constantly strives to provide the best service. As new products and changes to existing products are made, Vivísimo reserves the right to amend this Policy at any time. Any changes to this Policy will be posted on this page so that you are always aware of the current information collection and usage practices associated with Vivísimo Web Search Services. Your use of Vivísimo Web Search Services is also governed by the Terms of Service.
i.e. the standard "We can change things without really telling you" policy, wheras Yahoo say
Yahoo! may update this policy. We will notify you about significant changes in the way we treat personal information by sending a notice to the primary email address specified in your Yahoo! account or by placing a prominent notice on our site.
i.e. "We decide what's significant and what isn't"
I suppose the lesson to be learned is, don't trust summaries of privacy policies, read the runes. If Clusty seems less-threatening to you, by all means use it. At least it's not Coming Soon like Gigablast's policy. Don't expect your browsing history to remain private, anyway. As for me, Clusty manages to link together the current iteration of my website, and the 1999 "My First Web Site" train wreck, so I'm half impressed and half embarassed by their tech:)
Umm... go read their actual privacy policy, and play Spot The Difference with the relevant part of Yahoo's privacy policy.
Vivísimo does not rent, sell, or share its server logs with other people or non-affiliated companies except under the following circumstances:
We provide the information to companies who work on behalf of or with Vivísimo under confidentiality agreements. However, these companies do not have any independent right to share this information.
We may share with third parties certain pieces of aggregated, non-personal information. For example, the number of searches for a particular term, or how many clicks occurred on a particular advertisement.
We respond to subpoenas, court orders, or legal process, or to establish or exercise our legal rights or defend against legal claims.
We believe it is necessary to share information in order to investigate, prevent, or take action regarding illegal activities, suspected fraud, situations involving potential threats to the physical safety of any person, violations of Vivísimo's terms of use, or as otherwise required by law. When you click on an advertising or revenue-generating search result, Vivísimo Web Search Services are contacted, do record information, and such information may be shared with affiliated sites.
Vivísimo works with vendors, partners, and other service providers in different industries and categories of business. For more information regarding providers of products or services that you've requested please read our detailed product and solution information.
Yahoo! does not rent, sell, or share personal information about you with other people or nonaffiliated companies except to provide products or services you've requested, when we have your permission, or under the following circumstances:
We provide the information to trusted partners who work on behalf of or with Yahoo! under confidentiality agreements. These companies may use your personal information to help Yahoo! communicate with you about offers from Yahoo! and our marketing partners. However, these companies do not have any independent right to share this information.
We have a parent's permission to share the information if the user is a child under age 13. Parents have the option of allowing Yahoo! to collect and use their child's information without consenting to Yahoo! sharing of this information with people and companies who may use this information for their own purposes;
We respond to subpoenas, court orders, or legal process, or to establish or exercise our legal rights or defend against legal claims;
We believe it is necessary to share information in order to investigate, prevent, or take action regarding illegal activities, suspected fraud, situations involving potential threats to the physical safety of any person, violations of Yahoo!'s terms of use, or as otherwise required by law.
We transfer information about you if Yahoo! is acquired by or merged with another company. In this event, Yahoo! will notify you before information about you is transferred and becomes subject to a different privacy policy.
According to the blog post that announced it, Coverity were scanning 3.9 million lines of KDE code. Although the reports are a bit wonky at the moment, I'm sure Apache has more than 9 lines of code!
I barely use my Yahoo Mail account, but it gets 1000s of messages in the bulk folder. There's a consistent under 1% of spam that gets through, in the past, it's been stuff that's all in one image, more recently, it's been stuff sent from real Yahoo accounts (DomainKeys verified) that always includes one line of text, including a domain name with a space in it, followed by "oppsy no space before.com" or similar.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't worry, Diebold has just announced the results of the recount, and 3,134 of the 2,700 delegates voted to make Pluto stay as a planet.
My iAudio X5L already has 30GB, photo and video display. It also plays OGG and FLAC, which I suspect the masses don't care about. They do, however, care if their MP3 player is a fashion item or not (which is why so many people advertise to muggers by walking everywhere with their player out in their hand), and let's face it, one thing Microsoft doesn't have is Apple's aura of letting you be cool and different, just like everyone else.
The plan would be to bleed them dry for a few years, pocket the cash, and by the time the no R&D's caught up with them, they've stripped and sold the carcass and moved on. This happening to Microsoft sounds too good to be true, really.
I think it deserves one. Finally, an original idea in the endless stream of remakes and sequels!
The "Extend" in this sequence is extending the Microsoft product to be incompatible with the ones following the standard that they claim to have "embraced". I don't see what you are suggesting here, a Microsoft FF fork? You must be thinking of the "announce partnership, steal ideas, end partnership" gameplan, which won't work either, unless Microsoft need help downloading a source tarball.
Well, that is a story about the government repression of science. Sounds like both "news for nerds" and "stuff that matters". I agree that summaries shouldn't add unneeded "tension" to act as "commentary", but you seem to be saying that Slashdot should only cover non-controvertial topics, like ponies or something.
It all depends how it's done. The police can't secretly encourage somebody to commit crime, then arrest them for it. What they can do is set up traps in high-crime areas and catch the perpetrators. For example, leave mobile phone on car seat, hide in bushes. When the local phone thief walks past and smashes the window, pop out and arrest him. Similarly, forces operate capture cars (sometimes known as rat traps), left parked in areas with a problem with vehicle theft. When they're stolen, they automatically lock the doors, and notify the police, who can then pop round to collect the thief.
I'd expect setting up a predator trap would involve a somewhat larger operation.
Well, the government screwing up itself is one matter, it's just as I've noted before, it seems that the UK government likes to outsource its IT failures, and I'm sure the US is no different. It strikes me as plain bizarre that an entity in as good a bargaining position as a government can't get a good deal, and that they keep on hiring the same few consultancies who are clearly incompetent.
A government department actually got some money back from an IT supplier that screwed up? Why isn't it standard for this to happen, instead of taxpayers always picking up the bill for projects that never work properly and go overbudget?
I have the "Film that actually had something to do with the game" box set.
Actually, it's just a cardboard box I found.
I think the improvements in RFC 2549 are a big step, or flap maybe. Besides, there is already a working implementation of RFC 1149 for Linux.
Yes, but those treaties do not prevent individuals claiming the moon. So this guy claimed it. I just checked the Lunar Embassy website, and it mentions a bunch of accolades he's got from the National Republican Congressional Committee, but that is not his reasoning why he owns it.
I still think it's not the greatest purchase in the world, it's not like you can nip over there for a weekend to enjoy your patch.
I was doing nothing in particular, but I'm confident there was nothing introduced to the PC between some of the clean scans and those where "infections" were found. If I was more cynical, I'd suggest the trial product faked infections to sell you the real thing, but I expect that it was just an awful detection engine (that was, IIRC, later thrown away after they bought out a rival).
If you want to see what a virus detection looks like, then look up the EICAR test string.
If this helps wake people up to the fact that anti-virus programs simply don't work, all the better. For example, at one time or another, nearly every antivirus package has declared applications with NSIS installers as malware. I remember having a McAfee trial on my computer, that would regularly make up infections. Yet, when a slightly updated version of a worm comes out, you're unprotected.
My original point didn't hang on whether the scans were in-house or not, merely that the tests are run, so I'm not going to argue with what you meant to say. Shame you didn't get back to this earlier, you missed your chance to get a free plug in :)
There are already a load of retro arcade collections available. I own a ton of GBA ones. Most of them are pretty good reproductions, but a few are awkward (like Bubble Bobble needs to zoom out or scroll to get the correct resolution, Robotron doesn't work exactly right because the GBA didn't have enough Fire buttons). I also own Atari Retro Classics DS, which has to be the buggiest, most thrown-together piece of junk I've seen in a long time. I nearly gave it to a jumble sale, but if somebody paid 10p for it, they'd have been ripped off. My absolute favourite is the Game & Watch Gallery, as it has both the originals, and remakes that work, by capturing the spirit of the originals.
I don't think this is a way to crack down on the sites - abandonware doesn't mean it's legal to copy, it's more of an "ethical" gloss, that you're not denying anyone a sale if the thing actually isn't for sale. There is some genuinely legit stuff- many companies have released their rights to 8-bit home computer games, authors who have released their stuff, and occasional bundle deals like with the HotRod joystick. However, the way the law is at the moment, there is no requirement to actually sell a product to keep copyright, and companies have the legal right to shut down sites should they feel like it.
It should also be noted that in many cases, it really is basically impossible to get the games legally for an emulator. A few years back, I enquired with a bunch of companies (a) Do you sell collections of your "classic" games, and (b) If I buy one, can I then get matching ROMsets for these games and use the emulator of my choice. Sega pointed me at the SegaPC division, who sent me a note reminding me that piracy is evilwrongnaughtybad. The person I spoke to at Hasbro Interactive hadn't even heard of emulation and didn't understand why I wanted to play the originals over their shiny remakes. Activision had the clue to know what I was asking, and said sorry that their classics-related offerings didn't let me grab the equivalent ROMs.
Never mind that, when can I get Tony Hawks' Moldovan Tennis?
But! But! [insert terrorist action here] happened before [insert foreign policy screw-up here]. And why did the terrorists attack [insert somebody else's foreign policy screw-up here], when we're not even involved?
Signed, every minister that gets asked about terror on Today or PM
So, for readers in the UK, what's that in Routemaster London buses?
i.e. the standard "We can change things without really telling you" policy, wheras Yahoo say
i.e. "We decide what's significant and what isn't"
I suppose the lesson to be learned is, don't trust summaries of privacy policies, read the runes. If Clusty seems less-threatening to you, by all means use it. At least it's not Coming Soon like Gigablast's policy. Don't expect your browsing history to remain private, anyway. As for me, Clusty manages to link together the current iteration of my website, and the 1999 "My First Web Site" train wreck, so I'm half impressed and half embarassed by their tech
It seems that MySQL run their own Coverity scans.
According to the blog post that announced it, Coverity were scanning 3.9 million lines of KDE code. Although the reports are a bit wonky at the moment, I'm sure Apache has more than 9 lines of code!
I barely use my Yahoo Mail account, but it gets 1000s of messages in the bulk folder. There's a consistent under 1% of spam that gets through, in the past, it's been stuff that's all in one image, more recently, it's been stuff sent from real Yahoo accounts (DomainKeys verified) that always includes one line of text, including a domain name with a space in it, followed by "oppsy no space before .com" or similar.